>> If programmers later want to inflict programming expectations of
inheritance
>> and reuse on the communications thus created, they will do it, but that
>> madness should not be privileged as the canonical explanation. I'd argue
>> that those schemas should even stay private, as details specific to a
>> particular brittle implementation than as a symbol of broad agreement.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Simon St.Laurent
>> http://simonstl.com/
That is essentially the argument of WS-Interoperation. Broad agreements with
formal statements of general approach, inheritance and extension to define
variation within kind, WS-I to define specific implementation that conforms.
tc
_______________________________________________________________________
XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS to support
XML implementation and development. To minimize spam in the archives, you
must subscribe before posting.
[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe:
subscribe: List archive:
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
